Table Of ContentZootaxa 2933: 57–64 (2011) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition)
www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Forum ZOOTAXA
Copyright © 2011 · Magnolia Press ISSN1175-5334(online edition)
Cyber nomenclaturalists and the “CESA itch”
JAMES E. O’HARA
Canadian National Collection of Insects, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6, Can-
ada; e-mail: [email protected]
Not long ago, Neal Evenhuis (2008) treated us to a historical review of the mental affliction known by the quaint
term “mihi itch”. This condition is unique to taxonomists and manifests itself in the sufferer’s near uncontrollable
desire to name species. The mihi itch is less prevalent than it once was, but in recent years a new “itch” has
afflicted some of our fellow taxonomists. This I term the “CESA itch” (see below), and you may have seen its
effects already in a taxon of interest to you.
The CESA itch is seen most commonly in cyber nomenclaturalists. These are persons who scour the Internet
for lists and databases containing seemingly valid generic names that potentially have junior primary homonyms
lurking in their midst. The cyber nomenclaturalist, upon finding such a resource, diligently checks each and every
“valid” generic name against a nomenclator like Nomenclator Zoologicus (Neave 2005) or Systema Dipterorum
(Pape & Thompson 2010) in the hope of discovering senior primary homonyms that predate “valid” generic names.
Then, invoking the Principle of Homonymy (ICZN 1999, Article 52), new replacement names are published (gen-
erally a few at a time in a periodical edited by the authors) to take the place of the preoccupied names.
The two most active groups of cyber nomenclaturalists are located in Turkey. I shall focus on just one of them
to illustrate the nature of the work in which such groups indulge. This group consists of Prof. Dr. Ahmet Ömer
Koçak and Asst. Prof. Dr. Muhabbet Kemal Koçak, professors at Yüzüncü Yil Üniversitesi and co-owners of the
Centre for Entomological Studies Ankara (CESA) (http://www.cesa-tr.org/). Together, these scientists manage
CESA, edit its various publications, conduct research activities, and surf the Internet looking for taxonomic names
they can replace with their own. In what might be seen as acts of unnecessary self-indulgence, they have incorpo-
rated the acronym of their Centre (CESA) into over 60 of their new replacement names (Table 1). It therefore
seems fitting to christen this activity of homonym-hunting and replacement the “CESA itch”, in honor of the Cen-
tre that has created such a preponderance of CESA-inspired replacement names.
Koçak & Kemal (2009a) have rationalized their nomenclatural activities within the context of their studies on
the insects of Turkey, explaining that getting the names right is a necessary part of their work:
“Of course, Turkey, our land is placed in the focus of this survey. By doing this, we should search the fauna of not
only the neighbour countries, but also the continents, namely Eurasia and Africa, as their faunal elements inhabit
in various regions of Turkey in various rates. During our searches in the related literature, we have met with some
difficulties. Usually the Turkish authors of various insect groups, if use the scientific names of the taxa in their
publications, frequently mis-spelled the names, used the name with incorrect incomplete author names, or without
date of publications. These cases are less frequently seen among the publications by the foreign authors. We pre-
ferred, under these circumstances, to prepare correct scientific name lists of the pterygot orders under discussion;
consequently we made inevitably more nomenclatural than laboratorial studies at the beginning. Without cor-
rected faunal and taxonomical lists, such an enormous attempt cannot be successful. We strongly believe this;
therefore we have to make some preferences concerning Entomofauna survey, i.e., first nomenclatural studies,
taxonomical and faunal lists in our database systems, than the studies in the laboratory concerning the identifica-
tions the materials collected by us and their evaluations, including their descriptions.” (Koçak & Kemal 2009a: 2.)
Accepted by Z.Q. Zhang: 11 Jun. 2011; published: 29 Jun. 2011 57
Table 1. List of the majority of names proposed with “cesa”, the acronym for Centre for Entomological Studies
Ankara, embedded within them.
No CESA-based genus-group name Higher taxon Zoogeographic region(s)
1 Acaricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2ŭ008 Acarina, Holothyridae Australasian
2 Africesa Koçak, Hüseyinogl & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae Afrotropical
3 Amazonicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae Neotropical
4 Andicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Tachinidae Neotropical
5 Australicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae Australasian
6 Bracocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Braconidae Neotropical
7 Californicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Cecidomyiidae Nearctic
8 Cearacesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Orthoptera, Gryllidae Neotropical
9 Cercopicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hemiptera, Cercopidae Australasian
10 Cesabasis Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Tabanidae Australasian
11 Cesabracon Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Hymenoptera, Braconidae Afrotropical
12 Cesabrazilia Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae Neotropical
13 Cesachile Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Chilopoda, Linotaeniidae Neotropical
14 Cesachilus Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hymenoptera, Eumenidae Australasian
15 Cesacomora Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae Oriental
16 Cesacoris Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hemiptera, Lygaeidae Oriental
17 Cesagaster Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Diptera, Asilidae Neotropical
18 Cesametra Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Hemiptera, Gerridae Afrotropical
19 Cesamexico Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae Neotropical
20 Cesamorelosia Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Tachinidae Neotropical
21 Cesandria Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae Oriental
22 Cesapanama Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Tachinidae Neotropical
23 Cesapapua Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Homoptera, Cercopidae Australasian
24 Cesaperua Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Tachinidae Neotropical
25 Cesaphasma Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Phasmida, Pseudophasmatidae Neotropical
26 Cesaspheniscus Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Diptera, Tephritidae Palaearctic
27 Cesasundana Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae Oriental
28 Cesathrix Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Sciaridae Neotropical
29 Cesatropicalia Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae Neotropical
30 Chalicodoma subg. Cesacongoa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hymenoptera, Megachilidae Afrotropical
31 Chironocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Chironomidae Neotropical
32 Colombicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Sarcophagidae Neotropical
33 Eriophycesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Acarina, Eriophyidae Oriental
34 Formosacesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Pompilidae Oriental
35 Fulgoricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Homoptera, Fulgoridae Neotropical
36 Gautengicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Tachinidae Afrotropical
37 Holarcticesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hymenoptera, Eulophidae Nearctic, Palaearctic
38 Hoplobasis subg. Eurasicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Diptera, Limoniidae Palaearctic
39 Indonesicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Diptera, Neriidae Australasian
40 Kazachicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Homoptera, Delphacidae Palaearctic
41 Latinocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Homoptera, Cicadellidae Neotropical
42 Madagascesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae Afrotropical
43 Meruacesa Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Hymenoptera, Eulophidae Afrotropical
44 Mycomya subg. Cesamya Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Mycetophilidae Palaearctic
45 Namibiocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Diptera, Tephritidae Afrotropical
46 Orientalicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hymenoptera, Eumenidae Australasian, Oriental
47 Orienticesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Acarina, Phytoptidae Oriental
48 Pacificocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Asilidae Australasian
49 Pamirocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Diptera, Chironomidae Oriental
50 Papuacesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Hymenoptera, Sphecidae Australasian
51 Papuellicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Sphaeroceridae Australasian
52 Philippinocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Ephydridae Oriental
53 Phoricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Phoridae Australasian
54 Queenslandicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Homoptera, Delphacidae Australasian, Oriental
55 Ramburiella subg. Palaeocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Orthoptera, Acrididae Palaearctic
56 Sarcophaga subg. Caledonicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Sarcophagidae Australasian
57 Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Cecidomyiidae World
58 Seycellocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Arachnida, Linyphiidae Afrotropical
59 Suzukicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Acarina, Walchiidae Palaearctic
60 Taiwanocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Acarina, Diptilomiopidae Oriental
61 Tanzanicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2009 Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae Afrotropical
62 Thaicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2008 Acarina, Eriophyidae Oriental
63 Tingicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hemiptera, Tingidae Neotropical
64 Togocesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Lonchaeidae Australasian [Oceanian]
65 Velia subg. Cesavelia Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Hemiptera, Veliidae Oriental
66 Zealandicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 Diptera, Brachystomatidae Australasian
58 · Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press
O’HARA
The quote above helps to put into perspective the unique challenges faced by CESA study “Project Entomo-
fauna of Turkey”. Yet, it is difficult to comprehend why the preparation of a list of valid names of Turkish insects
has necessitated such broad homonym-hunting forays throughout all of Insecta (and beyond) and involving all zoo-
geographic regions of the world.
Even though only a small portion of Turkey is included within Fauna Europaea (de Jong 2010), one would
expect this valuable resource to provide an excellent starting point for a database of Turkish insects and would
reduce the need for a great deal of research on insect names throughout the rest of the world.
Koçak & Kemal have received some criticism of their nomenclatural activities, as revealed in this passage that
follows closely after the quote above:
“We are of the opinion that, studying on the nomenclature of the orders under discussion, are extremely serious
and necessary attempts as in the field or in the laboratory studies. From time to time, we have been receiving
some annoying, and provocative messages by some persons due to their intolerance of our nomenclatural activi-
ties. In the preamble of the Cesa, the following statement may be read every time ‘...researches regarding the
fauna, taxonomy, nomenclature ... are among its aims’. … By the way, we would like to explain our opinion about
the nomenclatural acts. According to the ICZN, it is a published act which affects the nomenclatural status of a
scientific name or the typification of a nominal taxon. Under these circumstances, a nomenclatural act is related
with the new synonyms, new combinations, new stati, new names, as well as all kinds of descriptions of the taxa,
type selections, designations, dates of publications, and the authorships. The meaning of the studying with the
nomenclature cannot be merely restricted with the proposing replacement names. Besides, the studying with the
nomenclature is not so different from the studying with the taxonomy. And it cannot be defined as a ‘nightmare’
that claimed by some persons unaccountably. Such an approach to the nomenclature and the scientists interested
in it, is simply not only absurd but also completely nonscientific. Final words that we would say are so; our proj-
ect is pure scientific; therefore it has no reward. And, if such a scientific attempt had been made by foreigners it
would be highly welcomed.” (Koçak & Kemal 2009a: 2–3.)
The above is framed within the context of “Project Entomofauna of Turkey”, but CESA also aspires to study
the world Insecta. Recent nomenclatural papers by Koçak and Kemal in CESA periodical Priamus invariably begin
with “Within the frame of ongoing Project Entomofauna of the World by the Cesa, nomenclatural studies on the
order [insert name here] have been carrying out by the authors for [“four years” or “a long time”].
Most taxonomists see the replacement of preoccupied names as a necessary part of a revisionary study or taxo-
nomic catalog wherein changes are proposed within some sort of context and by authors knowledgeable about the
taxa involved. After all, junior primary homonyms are not causing any trouble until they are discovered, and who
wants to offend colleagues by searching taxa in their speciality for names to replace? It is therefore not surprising
that papers devoted primarily to the establishment of new replacement names are commonly viewed as inappropri-
ate, opportunistic, and not entirely ethical.
Cyber nomenclaturalists first came to my attention after I posted on my website a list of the approximately
1520 valid generic names of Tachinidae (Diptera) (O’Hara 2005). This list consists of the names treated as valid in
regional catalogs or named or revised in later publications. The intent of the list is not to uncover junior primary
homonyms, or to provide a resource that can be used for that purpose. However, by collecting all the valid generic
names for the world Tachinidae into one place, the list quickly attracted the attention of cyber nomenclaturalists.
Papers with new replacement names in the Tachinidae soon began appearing with O’Hara (2005) cited among the
references. To date, six papers have been published proposing new replacement names in the Tachinidae (Özdik-
men 2006, 2007, 2010; Özdikmen & Abang 2006; Koçak & Kemal 2009b, 2010a) and I suspect my list of tachinid
genera has now been picked clean of junior primary homonyms.
Not only are cyber nomenclaturalists surfing the Internet for taxonomic lists and databases to explore, but there
is some competition for the choicest offerings. For example, the highly regarded Universal Chalcidoidea Database
(Noyes 2003) was discovered by two cyber teams at about the same time. Each team published a set of new
replacement names (Koçak & Kemal 2008; Özdikmen & Darılmaz 2009), but unfortunately the new names per-
tained to the same junior homonyms. The paper by Koçak & Kemal (2008) hit the streets first and won priority for
the names therein. The authors of the other paper published a follow-up paper in which they listed their unneces-
sary new names as new synonyms of the names that were published first, and appropriately entitled their paper,
“Battle of replacement names for the genera in Chalcidoidea” (Özdikmen & Darılmaz 2010).
CYBER NOMENCLATURALISTS AND THE “CESA ITCH” Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 59
Thus far I have reviewed the actions of cyber nomenclaturalists without commenting on the accuracy of their
published works. I became curious about this aspect of their research while compiling the list of CESA-inspired
names (Table 1) and delved a little deeper into some of the names involved. What I found during this review of
selected cases is presented below, arranged chronologically under their respective new replacement names.
Lehrera Koçak & Kemal, 2009 (Diptera, Sarcophagidae)
Koçak & Kemal (2009b: 7) proposed this new replacement name in the Sarcophagidae (Diptera) in this brief state-
ment: “Lehrera nom.n. pro Devriesia Lehrer, 1995 (Ent. Ber. Amsterdam 55 (10): 15814 nec Devriesia Mintz, 1967
(Diss.Abstr. 27B: 2748) (Echinodermata)”. Footnote 14 cites a recent usage of Devriesia Lehrer: “Devriesia Leh-
rer, l995 is currently treated as valid generic name (see: Lehrer, A.Z., 2006, Fragm. dipt. 3: 14–22)”.
There are several aspects of this nomenclatural act that are problematic:
1) It is advisable, but not necessary, when proposing a replacement name to cite the type species, to list other
affected species (i.e., new combinations), and perhaps to give some indication of where the taxa occur.
2) The first usage of the name Devriesia by Mintz (1967) in Dissertation Abstracts can be interpreted as unpub-
lished by Article 9.7 of the Code (ICZN 1999):
“Article 9. What does not constitute published work. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 8, none of the
following constitutes published work within the meaning of the Code: …
9.7. copies obtained on demand of an unpublished work [Art. 8], even if previously deposited in a library or
other archive.”
3) Even if Mintz (1967) is considered a published work, the name Devriesia was treated as unavailable by Kier &
Lawson (1978: 96):
“Mintz (1967: 2748) referred Toxaster lafittei to a new genus Devriesia Mintz but included no description of
the genus. Devriesia is, therefore, a nomen nudum.”
4) Current usage of Devriesia Lehrer was established by Koçak & Kemal (2009b) by reference to one of Lehrer’s
own publications (Lehrer 2006). However, Lehrer’s classification of the Sarcophagidae is viewed as oversplit
by most specialists of the family. The synonymy of Devriesia Lehrer with Sarcophaga (Heteronychia), as first
proposed by Pape (1996), was confirmed recently by Whitmore (2011) who studied the type series of the type
species Sarcophaga ferox Villeneuve, 1908.
The foregoing can be summarized as follows, with Lehrera Koçak & Kemal (2009b) falling into subjective synon-
ymy with S. (Heteronychia):
Sarcophaga subg. Heteronychia Brauer & Bergenstamm, 1889 (Diptera, Sarcophagidae)
Heteronychia Brauer & Bergenstamm, 1889: 124. Type species: Heteronychia chaetoneura Brauer & Bergen-
stamm, 1889 (= Sarcophaga dissimilis Meigen, 1826), by monotypy.
Devriesia Lehrer, 1995: 158. Type species: Sarcophaga ferox Villeneuve, 1908, by original designation.
Lehrera Koçak & Kemal, 2009b: 7 (unnecessary nomen novum for Devriesia Lehrer, 1995). New synonymy.
Gautengicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 (Diptera, Tachinidae)
Koçak & Kemal (2010a: 157) proposed Gautengicesa as a new replacement name for Pretoriana Curran, 1938, a
genus-group name preoccupied by Pretoriana Uvarov, 1922 (Orthoptera, Acrididae). They noted that Pretoriana
Curran was treated as a valid genus of Tachinidae by O’Hara (2008). However, O’Hara (2008) did not list generic
synonyms and Koçak & Kemal (2010a) failed to consult other sources to determine if another genus-group name is
available to take the place of preoccupied Pretoriana Curran. The standard reference on Afrotropical Tachinidae is
Crosskey (1980) and therein is given a junior subjective synonym of Pretoriana Curran that becomes the valid
name of the genus. Gautengicesa Koçak & Kemal falls into subjective synonymy with that genus-group name, as
follows:
60 · Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press
O’HARA
Myxogaedia Mesnil, 1956 (Diptera, Tachinidae)
Pretoriana Curran, 1938: 7 (junior primary homonym of Pretoriana Uvarov, 1922: 99). Type species:
Pretoriana setosa Curran, 1938, by original designation.
Myxogaedia Mesnil, 1956: 497. Type species: Myxarchiclops maculosus Villeneuve, 1916, by original
designation.
Gautengicesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010a: 157 (nomen novum for Pretoriana Curran, 1938). New synonymy.
Cesaperua Koçak & Kemal, 2010 (Diptera, Tachinidae)
The new replacement name Cesaperua was proposed by Koçak & Kemal (2010a: 159) to replace the preoccupied
nameXenophasia Townsend, 1934, a name treated as valid by O’Hara (2008). The authors gave the derivation of
the name as follows:
“The proposed new name is a combination of the institutional name and the country name, where the genus was
recorded. Necessary name combination is given below:
Cesaperua xanthomelanoides (Townsend, 1934) (comb.n.) Peru.”
Koçak & Kemal (2010a) correctly cited Townsend (1934: 207) for the description of Xenophasia Townsend.
However, they erred in the provenance of the genus. Townsend (1934: 207) cited the type locality of the single
included species as “Rio Tapajós … Urucurytuba”. This locality [now as “Urucurituba”] is in the state of Pará in
Brazil, not the country of Peru. Hence, the genus is named for the wrong country.
Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae)
This is a remarkable example of what can go wrong when junior primary homonyms are carelessly renamed.
Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) proposed Sauricesa as a new replacement name for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 (Diptera,
Cecidomyiidae [not Tabanidae as cited by Koçak & Kemal 2010b]), preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, 1916
(Trichoptera, Apataniidae). They were apparently unaware that Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 is also preoccupied by
Allomyia Felt, 1918 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae) and Allomyia Malloch, 1919 (Diptera, Scathophagidae), and
predates Allomyia Ren, 1998 (Diptera, Tabanidae). They listed 20 new combinations, all with Sauricesa as the
valid genus and all supposedly belonging to the dipteran family Tabanidae.
Koçak & Kemal (2010b) made a number of significant errors in their assessment of Allomyia names:
1) Gagné (2004) recognized Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 as preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, 1916 and replaced it
with Alliomyia Gagné, 2004. The genus contains a single species, Alliomyia saurica (Fedotova), known only
from Kazakhstan (Gagné 2004, 2010). Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) unnecessarily replaced Allomyia Fedotova,
1991 with Sauricesa and recognized S. saurica (Fedotova) as a new combination.
2) Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) mistakenly cited Sauricesa as a genus-group name in the Tabanidae. The correct
placement of Sauricesa is in the Cecidomyiidae.
3) Allomyia Banks, 1916 is a valid trichopteran genus in the family Apataniidae (Morse 2011). Koçak & Kemal
(2010b: 6) transferred 16 species of Allomyia Banks to Sauricesa (i.e., they moved 16 trichopteran species to
Diptera).
4) Allomyia Felt, 1918 (Cecidomyiidae) is a junior subjective synonym of Oligotrophus Latreille, 1805 (Gagné
2004, 2010). One Nearctic species of this Holarctic genus, O. juniperi (Felt), the type species of Allomyia
Felt, was reassigned to Sauricesa by Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) (i.e., they moved a cecidomyiid species
validly placed in Oligotrophus to Sauricesa).
CYBER NOMENCLATURALISTS AND THE “CESA ITCH” Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 61
5) Malloch (1923) recognized Allomyia Malloch, 1919 (Diptera, Scathophagidae) as preoccupied by Allomyia
Banks, 1916 and replaced it with Allomyella Malloch, 1923. Allomyella is a valid genus with a small number
of species in the Nearctic and Palaearctic Regions (Gorodkov 1986; Poole & Lewis 1996). Allomyella
unguiculata (Malloch), the type species of Allomyia Malloch, was reassigned to Sauricesa by Koçak & Kemal
(2010b: 6) (i.e., they moved the species from Scathophagidae to Cecidomyiidae).
6) Allomyia Ren, 1998 (Diptera, Tabanidae) is a junior primary homonym of Allomyia Banks, 1916 but has not
been given a replacement name. Ren (1998) named the genus for a single fossil species of Tabanidae,
Allomyiaruderalis Ren, 1998. Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) reassigned A.ruderalis Ren to Sauricesa (i.e., they
moved the species from Tabanidae to Cecidomyiidae). Even though Allomyia Ren is preoccupied by Allomyia
Banks, it is not replaced by Sauricesa because that name was proposed to replace Allomyia Fedotova, 1991, a
genus-group name in the Cecidomyiidae. No action is taken here to replace the preoccupied name Allomyia
Ren, 1998. That is best left to a specialist in the group.
As an outcome of the foregoing, not a single new combination of Koçak & Kemal (2010b) is tenable. All names
should revert back to their prior combinations with the caveat that Allomyia Ren, 1998 needs a new name.
Herewith are the 20 new combinations of Koçak & Kemal (2010b: 6) along with their proper placements and an
indication of the higher taxon to which each belongs:
Combination of Koçak & Kemal (2010b) Proper current combination Order, family
Sauricesa acanthis (Ross, 1950) Allomyia acanthis (Ross) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa bifosa (Ross, 1950) Allomyia bifosa (Ross) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa cascadis (Ross, 1950) Allomyia cascadis (Ross) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa chama (Denning, 1953) Allomyia chama (Denning) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa cidoipes (Schmid, 1968) Allomyia cidoipes (Schmid) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa coronae (Levanidova & Arefina, 1995) Allomyia coronae L. & A. Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa delicatula (Levanidova & Arefina, 1995) Allomyia delicatula L. & A. Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa gnathos (Ross, 1950) Allomyia gnathos (Ross) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa hector (Nimmo, 1971) Allomyia hector (Nimmo) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa juniperi (Felt, 1918) Oligotrophus juniperi (Felt) Diptera, Cecidomyiidae
Sauricesa picoides (Ross, 1950) Allomyia picoides (Ross) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa renoa (Milne, 1935) Allomyia renoa (Milne) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa ruderalis (Ren, 1998) “Allomyia” ruderalis Ren Diptera, Tabanidae
Sauricesa sajanensis (Levanidova, 1967) Allomyia sajanensis (Levanidova) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa saurica (Fedotova, 1991) Alliomyia saurica (Fedotova) Diptera, Cecidomyiidae
Sauricesa scotti (Wiggins, 1973) Allomyia scotti (Wiggins) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa sichotalinensis (Martynov, 1935) Allomyia sichotalinensis (Mart.) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa thomasi (Nimmo, 1977) Allomyia thomasi (Nimmo) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa tripunctata (Banks, 1900) Allomyia tripunctata (Banks) Trichoptera, Apataniidae
Sauricesa unguiculata (Malloch, 1919) Allomyella unguiculata (Malloch) Diptera, Scathophagidae
The findings above result in Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 falling into objective synonymy with Alliomyia
Gagné, 2004:
Alliomyia Gagné, 2004 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae)
Allomyia Fedotova, 1991: 21 (junior primary homonym of Allomyia Banks, 1916: 120, 122). Type species:
Allomyia saurica Fedotova, 1991, by original designation.
AlliomyiaGagné, 2004: 66 (nomen novum for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991).
Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010b: 6 (unnecessary nomen novum for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991). New
synonymy.
62 · Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press
O’HARA
No systematist can master all the literature and names of the entire Insecta. There is thus an inherent danger in
homonym-hunting beyond one’s area of expertise, as graphically illustrated by the examples above. Homonym-
hunting is not difficult, but once a junior primary homonym is found there is an expectation that careful research
into the consequences of renaming it will be pursued prior to the publication of a new replacement name. This is
not always easy to accomplish given the specialized literature associated with each preoccupied name. Cyber
nomenclaturalists may believe they are capable of thoroughly researching every name that appears to be
preoccupied, but in reality it is a perilous activity with possibly inaccurate outcomes. The examples above may
serve as a warning to the authors involved and to others who might follow in their footsteps to reconsider this
practise of renaming junior primary homonyms as an end unto itself. Yielding to the “CESA-itch” does not fulfill a
pressing need in taxonomy and is not generally welcomed by other taxonomists. This is precisely why so few
taxonomists engage in this activity. It is safe to say that most taxonomists believe it is more appropriate to leave
new replacement names to specialists of the taxa involved. If this suggestion is not heeded and the renaming of
junior homonyms continues unabated, then I caution my fellow taxonomists: Beware, a CESA name may be
coming to a taxon near you!
Acknowledgments
It is my pleasure to thank Thomas Pape (Natural History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen), Patrice Bouchard
(Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa), Daniel Whitmore (Centro Nazionale Biodiversità Forestale, Verona),
and John Morse (Clemson University, Clemon) for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. My
thanks also to Neal Evenhuis (Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu) for his comments as a reviewer of the
submitted manuscript.
References
A date of publication is given in square brackets after each reference where this is known.
Banks, N. (1916) A classification of our limnephilid caddice flies. Canadian Entomologist, 48, 117–122. [April issue]
Brauer, F. & Bergenstamm, J.E. von (1889) Die Zweiflügler des Kaiserlichen Museums zu Wien. IV. Vorarbeiten zu einer
Monographie der Muscaria Schizometopa (exclusive Anthomyidae). Pars I. Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der
Wissenschaften. Wien. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe, 56 (1), 69–180 + 11 pls. [March]
Crosskey, R.W. (1980) Family Tachinidae, pp. 822–882. In: Crosskey, R.W. (ed.), Catalogue of the Diptera of the Afrotropical
Region. British Museum (Natural History), London. 1437 pp. [10 July]
Curran, C.H. (1938) New Metopiidae and Tachinidae from Africa (Diptera). American Museum Novitates, 985, 1–8. [13 May]
de Jong, Y.S.D.M. (ed.) (2010) Fauna Europaea. Version 2.4. Available from: http://www.faunaeur.org. Accessed 18 April
2011.
Evenhuis, N.L. (2008) The “Mihi itch”—a brief history. Zootaxa, 1890, 59–68. [26 August]
Fedotova, Z.A. (1991) [Review of the gall midges of the subtribe Dasineurina (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Oligotrophini) in
Kazakhstan.] Izvestiya Akademii Nauk Kazakhskoï SSR, Seriya Biologicheskaya, 1991 (4), 16–25. [In Russian.]
Felt, E.P. (1918) New gall midges (Dipt.). Journal of Economic Entomology, 11, 380–384. [16 August]
Gagné, R.J. (2004) A catalog of the Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) of the world. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Washing-
ton, 25, 408 pp. [17 February]
Gagné, R.J. (2010) Update for a catalog of the Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) of the world. Digital version 1. Available from: http://
www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12754100/Gagne_2010_World_Catalog_Cecidomyiidae.pdf. Accessed 12 April
2011.
Gorodkov, K.B. (1986) Scathophagidae, pp. 11–41. In: Soós, Á. & Papp, L. (eds.), Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera. Volume
11. Scathophagidae—Hypodermatidae. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest and Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam. 346 pp.
[1 March]
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth edition
adopted by the International Union of Biological Sciences. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London. xxix
+ 306 pp.
Kier, P.M. & Lawson, M.H. (1978) Index of living and fossil echinoids 1924–1970. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiol-
ogy, 34, 182 pp. [10 February]
Koçak, A.Ö. & Kemal, M. (2008) Nomenclatural notes on the genus group names in the order Hymenoptera (Chalcidoidea).
Miscellaneous Papers, Centre for Entomological Studies Ankara, 143, 3–7. [15 October]
Koçak, A.Ö. & Kemal, M. (2009a) List of the coleopteran genera and species recorded in Turkey based upon the Info-system of
the Cesa. (Report of the temporary results of the Entomofauna of Turkey – 9.) Cesa News, 53, 213 pp. [18 December]
CYBER NOMENCLATURALISTS AND THE “CESA ITCH” Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 63
Koçak, A.Ö. & Kemal, M. (2009b) Notes on the nomenclature of some generic names of the order Diptera. Miscellaneous
Papers, Centre for Entomological Studies Ankara, 150, 7–8. [25 December]
Koçak, A.Ö. & Kemal, M. (2010a) Nomenclatural notes on the genus group names of some families (Diptera). Priamus, 12,
Part 6, 156–160. [19 March]
Koçak, A.Ö. & Kemal, M. (2010b) Nomenclatural notes on the genus group names of the order Diptera. Miscellaneous Papers,
Centre for Entomological Studies Ankara, 151, 5–7. [21 May]
Latreille, P.A. (1805) Histoire naturelle, genérale et particuliere, des crustacés et des insectes. Ouvrage faisant suite aux
oeuvres de Leclerc de Buffon, et partie du cours complet d’histoire naturelle rédigé par C.S. Sonnini, membre de plusieurs
Sociétés savantes. Tome quatorzième. F. Dufart, Paris. 432 pp. + pls. CIV–CXII. [20 February to 21 March]
Lehrer, A.Z. (1995) Revision du genre Salemea Rohdendorf et description de deux genres et d’une espèce palaéartiques nou-
veau (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Entomologische Berichten, 55, 157–162 [October]
Lehrer, A.Z. (2006) Liste des Sarcophaginae et Paramacronychiinae du Proche Orient, identifiés dans les collections de TAU
(Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Fragmenta Dipterologica, 3, 14–22. [May]
Malloch, J.R. (1919) The Diptera collected by the Canadian Expedition, 1913–1918. (Excluding the Tipulidae and Culicidae),
pp. 34c–90c. In: Anderson, R.M. (ed.), Report of the Canadian Arctic Expedition 1913–18. Volume III: Insects. Part C:
Diptera. King’s Printer, Ottawa. 90c pp. [14 July]
Malloch, J.R. (1923) Diptera of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska (except Tipulidae, Rhyphidae, and Calliphoridae). In: A biological
survey of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. Part II. Insects, arachnids, and chilopods of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. North
American Fauna, 46, 170–227 + pls. XII–XV. [20 June]
Mesnil, L.P. (1956) 64g. Larvaevorinae (Tachininae). Die Fliegen der Palaearktischen Region, 10 (Lieferung 189), 465–512 +
pls. X–XIV. [24 April]
Mintz, L.W. (1967) The origins, phylogeny, descendants of the echinoid family Disasteridae A. Gras, 1848. [Abstract.] Disser-
tation Abstracts, 27B, 2747–2748.
Morse, J.C. (ed.) (2011) Trichoptera world checklist. Available from: http://entweb.clemson.edu/database/trichopt/index.htm.
Accessed 12 April 2011.
Neave, S.A. (ed.) (2005) Nomenclator Zoologicus. Volume 1–10. A list of the names of genera and subgenera in zoology from
the tenth edition of Linnaeus 1758 to the end of 2004. Version 0.86. Available from: http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoo-
logicus. Accessed 18 April 2011.
Noyes, J.S. (2003) Universal Chalcidoidea database. Available from: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/chalcidoids/
index.html. Accessed 17 April 2011.
O’Hara, J.E. (2005) World genera of the Tachinidae (Diptera) and their regional occurrence. Version 1.0. PDF document, 69
pp.
Note: Version 1 was posted online 23 February 2005. The currently available PDF is Version 5.0, posted online 5 August 2010
and available from: http://www.nadsdiptera.org/Tach/Genera/Gentach_ver5.pdf.
O’Hara, J.E. (2008) World genera of the Tachinidae (Diptera) and their regional occurrence. Version 4.0. PDF document, 71
pp.
Note: Version 4 was posted online 31 December 2008. See O’Hara (2005) for further details about this work.
Özdikmen, H. (2006) New substitute names for two preoccupied tachinid genera Paragonia Mesnil, 1950 and Menetus
Aldrich, 1926 (Diptera). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 1, 270–272. [June]
Özdikmen, H. (2007) A nomenclatural act: replacement names for homonymous tachinid genera with lepidopteran genera
(Diptera: Tachinidae). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 2, 163–168. [January]
Özdikmen, H. (2010) Brasilomyia nom. nov., a new name for the preoccupied tachinid genus Platyphasmia Townsend, 1935
(Diptera: Tachinidae). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 5, 293–294. [January]
Özdikmen, H. & Abang, F. (2006) Sarawaka nom. nov, a replacement name for preoccupied genus Cleonice Thomson, 1864
(Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 1, 55–56. [January]
Özdikmen, H. & Darılmaz, M.C. (2009) Replacement names for some preoccupied chalcidoid genera (Hymenoptera: Chalci-
doidea). Journal of Entomological Science, 44, 37–42. [January issue]
Özdikmen, H. & Darılmaz, M.C. (2010) Battle of replacement names for the genera in Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). Munis
Entomology & Zoology, 5, 313–314. [January]
Pape, T. (1996) Catalogue of the Sarcophagidae of the world (Insecta: Diptera). Memoirs on Entomology, International, 8, 558
pp. [30 July]
Pape, T. & Thompson, F.C. (eds.) (2010) Systema Dipterorum. Version 1.0. Available from: http://www.diptera.org/. Accessed
11 April 2011.
Poole, R.W. & Lewis, R.E. (1996) Nomina Insecta Nearctica. A checklist of the insects of North America. Volume 3: Diptera,
Lepidoptera, Siphonaptera. Entomological Information Services, Rockville, Maryland. 1143 pp.
Ren, D. (1998) Late Jurassic Brachycera from northeastern China (Insecta: Diptera). Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica, 23, 65–83.
[October]
Townsend, C.H.T. (1934) New Neotropical oestromuscoid flies. Revista de Entomologia, 4, 201–212, 390–406. [27 June (pp.
201–212), 5 September (pp. 390–406)]
Uvarov, B.P. (1922) On some new or little-known South African grasshoppers. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Ser. 9,
9, 99–113. [January]
Whitmore, D. (2011) New taxonomic and nomenclatural data on Sarcophaga (Heteronychia) (Diptera: Sarcophagidae), with
description of six new species. Zootaxa, 2778, 1–57. [28 February]
64 · Zootaxa 2933 © 2011 Magnolia Press
O’HARA
